Why Vaatu and Raava are Ridiculously Off-Base
by Phabel
Summary: Like many parts of Legend of Korra, Raava and Vaatu are meant to represent a part of Asian culture. Specifically, they allude to Taoism, a philosophy that includes the belief that opposing forces balance each other out, and if one becomes too powerful, everything comes undone. This seems to fit the story of Raava and Vaatu, but let me assure you, there's more to it than that.


I'm not entirely sure what the general consensus on this one is, but I'm pretty sure I'm about to upset a number of you when I say that I did not enjoy season two of Legend of Korra, especially the mythology concerning Raava and Vaatu. So, let me make it clear right now, angry reviewers: my reasons for not liking Raava amd Vaatu are not based on my opinion of the season as a whole. They are based almost entirely (excepting some comparisons with the original series) on the real-world mythology from which the two spirits draw their origin, that being Taoism. Unless you, too, have read all eighty-one poems in Laozi's Tao Te Ching, I am the superior on this. Don't try to argue. You will lose.

Now, I already mentioned that Raava and Vaatu are supposed to be adaptations of some areas of Taoism. Specifically, Yin and Yang. And, boy, what an awful adaptation it is. Not only does it completely contradict Taoism, but it also goes against Avatar: the Last Airbender and creates massive plot holes in the season finally.

Taoism often highlights, among other things, a constant balance in the world. It states that opposites are not only at peace, but depend on one another to exist. Think about it: could there be a top without a bottom? Happiness without pain? Darkness without light? This core belief is tossed out the instant Raava and Vaatu appear, because they roll onscreen fighting one another. If this were accurate, the two of them would have instead been symbiotic; they'd differ, but would be forever attached and dependent on one another to survive and thrive. Instead, they chose to portray Vaatu and Raava as the ultimate evil pitted against the ultimate good; a bland, black-and-white argument rather than an interesting relationship between two spirits who find peace in spite of their differences. In short: they completely missed the point.

However, they don't miss everything. One thing that the show does attempt to represent is the Taoist belief that, when one force becomes too strong, the world is thrown out of balance. This belief was also represented in the original series, with the Fire Nation being the force that got too big for it's britches. However, while the original clearly showed that the Fire Nation was not _all_ bad, and that each nation had flaws that could throw the world out of balance if they became too powerful, Legend of Korra portrays Vaatu as the ultimate evil. According to the show, the world is only "balanced" when one side of an issue completely obliterates the other, which not only contradicts Taoism, but also goes against the original series.

When summarizing the moral of Avatar, it basically comes down to this: war is bad. It is an awful thing, and if we could all try to make peace instead of destroying each other, our situation might improve. It was perfectly Taoist, and perfectly moral. Leave it to Legend of Korra to screw it up, though. If you want to summarize the morals of both season two and one of Legend of Korra, it would amount to this: defeat your enemy, they're evil and unjustified. Whereas Avatar was worldly and wise, Legend of Korra is one-sided and unintelligent. It undermines everything that went on in the original.

I could stop here, but I haven't yet addressed the finally, which is likely the most infuriating part of all.

The Legend of Korra season two attempts, once again, to address the constant balance of Taoism in it's solution to the Vaatu menace: Korra finds the light within the darkness, thus defeating Vaatu. It seems perfectly Taoist, stating that there's always light within the dark. Nothing wrong with that, right?

Nothing wrong, that is, until you consider the reverse of what it implies. Taoism also emphasizes that there is no bottom without a top, no pain without happiness, and no light without darkness. By destroying Vaatu, Korra would therefore be destroying Raava as well. In fact, while we're at it, if there is always "light within the darkness," it also means that there's always darkness within the light, right? In that case, Vaatu was never really destroyed, and Korra's epic battle was completely and utterly pointless. Raava, at some point, even says that she can't exist without Vaatu. So, if that's the case, why doesn't Vaatu appear know this? Does he just not care that if he kills Raava, he'll end up killing himself as well? And, if they both know that they need each other to survive (which we must assume they do, being that they're portrayed as all-knowing, all-powerful, equally matched spirits) why are they fighting to begin with? It all comes down to a lack of understanding of the source material, which ultimately creates these massive plot holes.

How this managed to go so wrong is beyond me. Just based on this season alone, a person might conclude that the two of them butchered the lesson they were trying to convey out of a lack of understanding of the material, but they've properly represented Taoism before, so it simply does not add up. Perhaps they just weren't up for it this time around, or maybe there was some measure of involvement from some stick-in-the-mud board of directors that forced them to write it this way. All I know is that the atrocious representation of Taoist beliefs goes against everything Taoism actually stands for while also serving to undermine a perfectly good original series and tear gaping holes in the story. Nice one, Bryke.


End file.
